UPS was recently sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which resulted in a $150000 settlement although the EEOC commended UPS for “working collaboratively with the EEOC to resolve the remaining issues in this lawsuit.” The case took place as a result of a UPS discrimination lawsuit that was filed by a former employee in Jacksonville, Florida, who was denied breaks by the UPS HR department despite it being a necessary accommodation for their diabetes condition. The employee was then fired on the grounds that they could be a potential “liability.” The EEOC UPS lawsuit could have escalated further into a long-drawn-out litigation battle but UPS, or United Parcel Service, decided to settle instead.
Image credit – UPS
Why was UPS sued by the EEOC?
According to reports, in early 2023, an employee who had just joined the company requested the UPS HR department to provide short breaks as they had diabetes and required a few moments to eat or drink something and check their blood sugar levels to ensure the numbers looked okay. The employee requested occasional breaks of less than five minutes in order to attend to any of the discomforts of the condition in between work, and reportedly, the UPS HR department agreed to the accommodation at first. This did not last, however, as the HR department reportedly backtracked on their decision and fired the employee, stating that their condition could be a liability to the company.
This is when UPS was sued. The EEOC filed the UPS discrimination lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division after an initial attempt to reach a pre-litigation settlement. The court found that UPS had violated the worker’s rights under the American Disabilities Act for their disregard for providing basic accommodations and then indulging in unlawful firing as well. Both parties were instructed to meet to reach an agreement on how to proceed.
The EEOC-UPS lawsuit finally ended with a $150,000 settlement and an additional consent decree that UPS will have to follow through with religiously for the next three years. According to the decree, UPS must review their ADA policy and ensure that the UPS HR department is more accommodating towards employees with disabilities. Along with posting a notice about the lawsuit, the company will have to provide additional training to both managerial staff as well as bargaining unit employees and set an employee hotline in place to address further such complaints within the organisation. A final result of UPS being sued by the EEOC is that the company has had to offer to reinstate the employee who was discriminated against.
The American Disabilities Act
The UPS discrimination lawsuit is a good reminder for companies to be more considerate regarding the needs of the employees and also the guidelines that the law provides for the protection of employees with disabilities. The EEOC-UPS lawsuit demands a close look at the American Disability Act that was violated in this case, and the simple but serious protection it provides for those already impaired by their health conditions.
The ADA states that a person is considered to have a disability when:
- They have a physical or mental condition that substantially limits a major life activity. If the symptoms come and go, the defining detail will focus on how limiting the symptoms are while in the active state
- They have a history of disability
- They are subject to adverse employment action because of an impairment, whether physical or mental, that they have or are perceived to have. Transitory conditions expected to last less than 6 months or minor conditions are not covered here
Exploring “Reasonable Accommodation” and “Undue Hardship”
According to the act, when employees or even job applicants, request modifications in their work, whether in the private, federal, state or local government, anything that falls within the title of “reasonable accommodation” should be provided to them. The extent of “reasonable accommodation” is not as clearly defined but it includes anything that the employer can provide without undue hardship to themselves. In the UPS discrimination lawsuit, the accommodation requested was simple enough to provide and did not require the company to invest significant resources or face additional losses in order to provide the employees with the breaks they requested.
An employer cannot claim undue hardship just because the request comes with additional costs either. If the accommodation is truly too difficult to provide, the employer can provide other reasonable accommodations to address the needs of the employee. They can choose the solution that best works for them as well as the employee, ensuring the employee is able to conduct their duties just like others at the organization.
It is essential to understand that not all disabled employees are completely unable to work and that some can maintain a job and perform well, but they do require simple adjustments to make it more comfortable or viable. UPS was sued because they fired an employee on the grounds of their disability and refused to provide accommodations that were easily within their reach. It is useful to see the EEOC take action to help employees ensure they still have a place in the workforce despite their health condition, which in turn helps them maintain their quality of life.